Live data from Hacker News

Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

strongtowns.org

1–10 of 564 posts

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#2
> Places like this are expensive because places like this are scarce, and scarce things almost always become expensive.

> The answer to this isn't to lower our standards for design or to be dismissive of the things that are really lovable about these places. The answer is simply to allow a lot more Milwaukee Avenues to exist. And the same goes for the likes of all of today's beloved, "charming" historic districts.

It's hard to me to point at the right paradigm, but it reminds me a lot of the "trickle down" principle, of flooding the top with valuable properties at affordable prices and expect that some of it will still be there for the plebes like us once the top people are satiated.

I'm totally in for building more quality housing and neighborhoods, but there needs to be a lot more thought put into it.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#5

> Places like this are expensive because places like this are scarce, and scarce things almost always become expensive. > The answer to this isn't to lower our standards for design or to be dismissive of the things that are really lovable about these places. The answer is simply to allow a lot more Milwaukee Avenues to exist. And the same goes for the likes of all of today's beloved, "charming" historic districts. It…

> and expect that some of it will still be there for the plebes like us once the top people are satiated

Well, there definitely won't be any still there if you don't build something in the first place.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#6

> Places like this are expensive because places like this are scarce, and scarce things almost always become expensive. > The answer to this isn't to lower our standards for design or to be dismissive of the things that are really lovable about these places. The answer is simply to allow a lot more Milwaukee Avenues to exist. And the same goes for the likes of all of today's beloved, "charming" historic districts. It…

Housing is an interesting one though - it's not very liquid as in a very small % of the inventory changes hands every year so removing a premium with extra supply might have a big impact, especially if supply costs are not impacted. If impact on supply cost is marginal then ensuring that all properties are nice might be a way to improve the standard of living for a whole lot of folks.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#7

> Places like this are expensive because places like this are scarce, and scarce things almost always become expensive. > The answer to this isn't to lower our standards for design or to be dismissive of the things that are really lovable about these places. The answer is simply to allow a lot more Milwaukee Avenues to exist. And the same goes for the likes of all of today's beloved, "charming" historic districts. It…

The difference is that usually expensive properties are expensive to build. They are expensive because the houses and lots are huge, they are designed by expensive architects, use expensive materials, require custom and labor intensive techniques and have luxurious amenities.

Walkable neighborhoods can be build cheaply. What makes them expensive is demand and land.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#8
Fantastic cultural divide. This is one of the reasons why I read HN. Most of Europe is more or less walkable - one reason is that the largest urban centers predate cars, but intentional design AF (anno ford) is also a factor.

I can bike or walk everywhere, and the only reason I have a car is that it makes grocery shopping much, much easier. I am not very green or anything, I just like to keep things simple.

You can check out my hoods in Helsinki in Google maps and streetview (not giving my actual address but close enough).

There are has several high quality universities, and several well known startups and game studios operating within the view I linked below. All of it is walkable/cyclable/public transportable.

https://www.google.com/maps/@60.192987,24.8679369,10181m/dat...

Most of Scandinavia is similar, as you get to mainland Europe with bigger population density the story diversifies, but we don't really hear "only rich people can walk" stories here.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#9
post #3

I don’t get why there are so few walkable places. The demand is there and willing to pay a premium, and the small lots and narrow streets should make it fairly inexpensive to build.

Regulation, education, inertia. All of those tell specialist things like "streets have to be at least this wide in residential areas". Zoning can make it impossible for the requirements of daily life to be in walkable distance.

There is also some scale issues. A walkable city is great. A walkable neighborhood might not be, not if it is too small and everyone has to drive to work, to the grocer and to the doctor. Public transport makes only sense if it can move enough people. All drivers (so everyone) will be uncomfortable with the walkable, but disconnected small neighborhood.

There has been some rethinking in the last decade or so and cities are trying to become more walkable, more livable and less car focused with increasing frequency.

Re: Our self imposed scarcity of nice places

#10
I read this and think “ah, well there are many more non-rich people so the density requirements make this sort of thing complicated” and then I look out the window over the European city I live in where it has been achieved. Then I think about the town an hour away with a vibrant community and pleasant human-scale environment. What makes it all possible? Good transit. Clean buses. The US simply doesn’t have that, and probably not even the political will to make it happen. What a shame.
Post reply on HN